Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC staff proposal assessments for 2013-2014 Round 2 are posted
Thanks for your answer dariusz! Still, I think there are still 3 critical issues: It requires that chapters are really able to express, in a foreign language, advanced phenomena and characteristics of their work. I have seen grant applications that prove the opposite, The only thing I Ask for, is that you first grant someone 140'usd, and they apply for more, then at least you should visit that chapter. There Are not 20 such chapters, there Are close to 2. When you havn't even visited their chapter a single time ever, how can you then make up your mind about for example, their cooperative spirit, their ability to stage good events, the appropriatness of their office space for employee growth, their relations with the community, etc. Visits to chapters that apply or consider to apply for large grants, could make up for eventual language issues or other inabilites to express everything in written, The third is that the FDC does not Ask for consistent information over time, which brings on a risk of comparing metrics that aren't actually comparable. We experienced it this year, we have been required to report more metrics but they are not actually specified. And we experience ex-post questions about metrics that weren't asked ex-ante for. So everry chapter has to do a lot of guesswork, and comparison of results between, for example, wmse, wmno, and wmfr, is virtually impossible. In the absence of comparable output data, one typically reverts to Ask for desktop input data, risk-minimizing characteristica, and prosessual characteristica. The quarterly reporta could help a lot, and they indicate required metrics, but don't specified them. I could og dreper into this If required. Erlend Den lørdag 10. mai 2014 skrev Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl følgende: hi Erlend, there is a systematic schedule of site visits by WMF, but obviously it cannot be done for each chapter every year. From my grantmaking experience with several major foundations, I have to say that doing assessments basing on desktop materials is typical. In fact, the professional standard, even for foundations trying to keep close, friendly and intimate contact with their organizations (like e.g. was within HESP Soros network, that I had a chance to observe from within), relies on rare site visits, (every couple of years). I don't think that it would be a reasonable allocation of resources to fly people to 20+ chapters every year - in fact, if we wanted to do that, we'd have to have a separate person hired specifically for that purpose. The allocation of resources in our movement relies, to large extent, on trust in the submitted material. In other words, we take what you write about yourself for granted. Questions/comments serve further clarification purposes. best, dariusz (pundit) On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Erlend Bjørtvedt erl...@wikimedia.nojavascript:; wrote: As seen from distance in Paris, it seems like the assessment prosess is a mix of well-reasoned, prepared, and coincidential. In our case, the assessment is based on clever desk-top metrics, but not on any real knowledge of the local programs or their actual implementation. Foundation would have to visit chapters before evaluating them, but that has not happened. It is unfortunate that smaller chapters be assed without anyone in the WMF ever having visited the chapter and assessed the program impact in its local setting. As it stands, fdc assessment of wmno is 100% desktop and theoretical. That should really change If grantmaking is to be professionalized. Erlend Bjørtvedt Wmno Den fredag 9. mai 2014 skrev Risker risker...@gmail.com følgende: Thank you for your correction, Kasia - it now reads In order to avoid a potential bias assessing their own proposal, FDC have asked Wikimedia Deutschland (WMDE) to do the staff assessment of the WMF's proposal. [1] If I may suggest, since the FDC didn't submit the proposal that was assessed (the WMF did), that you can simplify this further by eliminating the first clause, and simply saying FDC have asked Wikimedia Deutschland (WMDE) to do the staff assessment of the WMF's proposal. The FDC can explain further itself why it has asked WMDE to do the assessment, if it desires. Risker/Anne [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Wikimedia_Foundation/Proposal_assessment_by_Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V.diff=0oldid=8460331 On 9 May 2014 11:07, Kasia Odrozek kasia.odro...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hi Risker, It was indeed an unintentional mistake and thank you for pointing it out. I have corrected it in the assessment. Best, Kasia 2014-05-09 17:00 GMT+02:00 Risker risker...@gmail.com: Actually, Dariusz, if the FDC (which is not WMF/FDC staff) made the request, then the sentence is incorrect. As it is currently
Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC staff proposal assessments for 2013-2014 Round 2 are posted
You may also visit an overview of the financial information presented in these proposals, which includes information for all proposals in this round: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Financial_overview This page is empty. Vince ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC staff proposal assessments for 2013-2014 Round 2 are posted
On 10 May 2014, at 19:43, Balázs Viczián balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu wrote: You may also visit an overview of the financial information presented in these proposals, which includes information for all proposals in this round: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Financial_overview This page is empty. Thanks for pointing that out; I've turned it into a redirect to the correct page. Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC staff proposal assessments for 2013-2014 Round 2 are posted
Hi Risker, It was indeed an unintentional mistake and thank you for pointing it out. I have corrected it in the assessment. Best, Kasia 2014-05-09 17:00 GMT+02:00 Risker risker...@gmail.com: Actually, Dariusz, if the FDC (which is not WMF/FDC staff) made the request, then the sentence is incorrect. As it is currently written, it states that WMF/ FDC staff contacted WMDE directly made the request, and implies that the FDC itself had no role in this decision. The WMF/FDC staff have made it very clear that they have not completed any assessment report in relation to the WMF request. [1] The sentence in the WMDE assessment should be corrected. Risker/Anne [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Wikimedia_Foundation/Staff_proposal_assessment On 9 May 2014 10:51, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote: hi, let me clarify - asking WMDE was an independent decision of the FDC, and not of the FDC staff. The FDC reached out to WMDE regarding this request, and the FDC staff has assisted us since then. The sentence is thus true, although may sound misleading. best, dj pundit On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Winifred. These appear to be very good, and I largely agree with the assessment. I know that the WMF FDC staff did not review the WMF submission; it was partially reviewed by WMDE. In the first sentence of the introduction to their report they say In order to avoid a potential bias assessing their own proposal, WMF/FDC staff have asked Wikimedia Deutschland (WMDE) to do the staff assessment of the WMF's proposal.[1] This is not consistent with what the FDC chair and members told us in the thread on Wikimedia-L. Did the WMF/FDC staff request that WMDE do the assessment? Risker/Anne [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Wikimedia_Foundation/Proposal_assessment_by_Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V . ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- __ dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak profesor zarządzania kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego i centrum badawczego CROW Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Nauk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Kasia Odrozek Vorstandsreferentin / Consultant to the Executive Director Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49 (030) 219 158 260 Mobil: +49 151 46752534 http://wikimedia.de http://www.wikimedia.de/ Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] FDC staff proposal assessments for 2013-2014 Round 2 are posted
Greetings, all: Staff proposal assessments have been posted on Meta for three proposals that were submitted in 2013-2014 Round 2. At the FDC's request, FDC staff have not published an assessment for the WMF proposal; however, an assessment of the WMF proposal has been published by WMDE. The proposal assessments are each linked to from the Proposals page for this round: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Proposals/2013-2014_round2http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2013-2014_round2 . You may also visit an overview of the financial information presented in these proposals, which includes information for all proposals in this round: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Financial_overview . The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about how to allocate Wikimedia movement funds to support an organization’s overall annual plan to achieve mission objectives. We encourage you to visit the portal if you would like more information about the FDC process, or would like to discuss the process: http://meta.wikimedia .org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal. Staff proposal assessments are but one of many inputs into the FDC process. With this round's assessments we (FDC staff) have included a more detailed explanation of our methodology. The assessments reflect the work of FDC staff who read the proposals, review past and current reports, receive internal input from WMF Finance, Programs, Legal, and Grantmaking, and consider a portfolio view across all proposals in this round. They do not reflect the analysis or views of the FDC or any of its individual members. The FDC will meet in late may to deliberate on these proposals, and will consider these staff proposal assessments along with many other inputs into the FDC process. For more information about the purpose of these assessments and how they fit into the FDC process overall, please visit: http://meta. wikimedia .org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_the_Creation_and_Initial_Operation_of_the_FDC#Process_overview . We welcome discussion about individual assessments on the discussion page of each assessment, or discussion about the process overall on the FDC portal: *https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Comments https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Comments*. Best regards from FDC staff! Winifred -- Winifred Olliff FDC Support Team Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
